Spells: How Many Levels?

[Dausuul]

In the early editions, wizards had 9 spell levels and clerics had 7. In 3E, all full caster classes had 9. In 4E, there were potentially as many spell levels as there were levels in the game.

Setting aside the question of whether there should be 0-level "cantrips," how should spell levels work in 5E?

 

[CleverNickName]

I like having 9 levels of spells...it's been that way in my group since the BECM rules set.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

I don't really have a preference. I like the clarity of the 4E model for knowing how powerful a given thing is, but it was hardly as if the 9 spell levels was a total problem.

I do think that the 4E version might have worked better had they stayed with 20 character levels, as I'm not sure that the traditional 9 wizard levels really stretches well across 30 character levels. There is something to be said for taking one of the nine spell levels and moving individual spells in it up or down a notch depending upon relative power. But once you start doing more than that, it could have been a complete spell level move in the old system.

 

[Ahnehnois]

I liked it when 3e put the divine and nondivine casters on the same footing.

I don't particularly see the impetus to make spell level and character level it's acquired at the same number. Was anyone confused by spell level vs character level? Was 10 levels of granularity in spell design not enough?

If you're going to work within the general model of how D&D magic has worked in the past, I think 9 levels for all is the best of the options presented.

Though I hope they make more flexible spells and we don't have to have lesser and greater versions of everything wasting space in the books.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

Other. Sort of.

On the one hand, I think 9 levels of spells is one of those things that taps into the heart of D&D magic. It's an automatic identifier that you are "most likely" playing Dungeons and Dragons.

However, matching up spells to level simplifies things somewhat. What I would like to see is characters of only 10 levels but of three threads: race, class and theme where each thread is also of 10 components overlaying that 10 level spine. So for example at Level 1 and each level after, you get racial "stuff", class stuff and theme stuff. This would bring into line the power of a character's "level" with spell levels nicely.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Stormonu]

9 for pure casters (Wizards), 7 for mixed (Clerics/Druids), 5 for dabblers (Paladin, Ranger).

I really think it was a mistake to give Clerics a full 9 levels in 3.5.

And while 4E's "spell level=character level" mostly works, I just like the "9 levels of spells (+ cantrips)" better.

 

[jedavis]

I'm unconvinced that even wizards need a full nine... I'd be OK with all full-casters being closer to seven (ergo other).

 

[SeRiAlExPeRiMeNtS]

It is confuse yes, maybe if spell "level" uses another name...

I liked it when 3e put the divine and nondivine casters on the same footing.

I don't particularly see the impetus to make spell level and character level it's acquired at the same number. Was anyone confused by spell level vs character level? Was 10 levels of granularity in spell design not enough?

If you're going to work within the general model of how D&D magic has worked in the past, I think 9 levels for all is the best of the options presented.

Though I hope they make more flexible spells and we don't have to have lesser and greater versions of everything wasting space in the books.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

9 for pure casters (Wizards), 7 for mixed (Clerics/Druids), 5 for dabblers (Paladin, Ranger).

I really think it was a mistake to give Clerics a full 9 levels in 3.5.

If there was a "Priest", would you be happy with them getting 9 levels? Where does the Bard fit? Can they have a similar relation to the wizard as a Cleric does to a Priest?

Just some thoughts.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Nebten]

And the Gygax spake, saying, "First shalt thou take out the Holy Player's Handbook. Upon review of the spell levels thou count to nine, no more, no less. Nine shall be the number thou shalt count, and the number of the counting shall be nine. Ten shalt thou not count, neither count thou eight, excepting that thou then proceed to nine. Eleven is right out. Once the number nine, being the ninth number, be reached, then lobbest thou thy Time Stop, Meteor Swarm & Wish at thy foe, who, being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it."

Amen *bonk*